여객자동차운수사업법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Although it is apparent that the defendant, on the grounds of appeal, lent the name of passenger transport business under the Passenger Transport Service Act to the branch officers, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged, the court below erred by erroneous determination.
2. In full view of all the evidence presented by the Prosecutor, it was proved that the entry officers independently operated an individual vehicle without excluding each transportation company under the Defendant’s management was beyond reasonable doubt.
subsection (b) of this section.
citing the circumstances cited by the court below
It is justified to determine that it is insufficient to prove that the entry officers independently operate an individual vehicle without excluding each transportation company of the defendant's management.
In the judgment of the court below, there were errors by misapprehending the facts alleged by the prosecutor in the grounds of appeal.
subsection (b) of this section.
3. We cannot accept the appeal by the prosecutor of conclusion.